10nfl1-Nukes-Cover
GIVING UP US NUCLEAR DETERRENCE COULD PRECIPITATE THE MOST
Download 1.23 Mb. View original pdf
|
| GIVING UP US NUCLEAR DETERRENCE COULD PRECIPITATE THE MOST DANGEROUS WAR IN HISTORY. Mark Schneider National Institute for Public Policy, ʻ08] The Future of the US. Nuclear Deterrent Comparative Strategy, Volume 27, Issue 4, July 2008, pages 345 - 360 According to the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review, the United States must maintain a robust nuclear deterrent, which remains a keystone of US. national power The reason should be self evident—without a nuclear deterrent the United States could be destroyed as an industrial civilization and our conventional forces could be defeated by a state with grossly inferior conventional capability but powerful WMD. We cannot afford to ignore existing and growing threats to the very existence of the United States as a national entity. Missile defenses and conventional strike capabilities, while critically important elements of deterrence and national power, simply can't substitute for nuclear deterrence. In light of the emerging strategic partnership between Russia and China and their emphasis on nuclear weapons it would be foolish indeed to size US. strategic nuclear forces as if the only threat we face is that of rogue states and discard the requirement that the US. nuclear deterrent be second to none Ignoring the PRC nuclear threat because of Chinese no first use propaganda is just as irresponsible. Absent a nuclear deterrent to their WMD use, rogue states could defeat our forces by the combination of few nuclear EMP weapons and large chemical and biological attacks. The situation would be much worse if they build a more extensive nuclear strike capability as has been reported. Freezing US. nuclear forces at the technical level of the Reagan administration will assure that, within two decades, Russia, China, India, and probably others will be technically superior and US. deterrence ability against CBW attack will be reduced. United States nuclear forces must be modernized and tailored to enhance deterrence and damage limitation against the rogue WMD threat. WMD capabilities have given otherwise inconsequential states the ability to kill millions of people. The right combination of missile defense and conventional and nuclear strike capabilities provide the best deterrent and damage limiting capability against the rogue state threat. We must not ignore the requirement to provide extended deterrence to our allies. British and French nuclear forces are not large enough, and these nations are not perceived as tough enough, to provide a deterrent for NATO Europe against Russia. In the Far East, there is literally no nuclear deterrent capability against China other than that provided by the United States. Failure to provide a credible deterrent will result in a wave of nuclear proliferation with serious national security implications. When dealing with the rogue states, the issue is not the size of the US. nuclear deterrent but the credibility of its use in response to chemical or biological weapons use and its ability to conduct low collateral damage nuclear attacks against WMD capabilities and delivery systems including very hard underground facilities for purposes of damage limitation. We must also have the capability to respond promptly. The United States nuclear guarantee is a major deterrent to proliferation. If we do not honor that guarantee, or devalue it, many more nations will obtain nuclear weapons. If arms control really becomes a substitute for nuclear deterrence and defense, it may very well precipitate the most destructive war in history. 10NFL1-Nuclear Weapons Page 135 of 199 www.victorybriefs.com Download 1.23 Mb. Share with your friends:
|